Shapton pro series or ohishi waterstones?

[derekcohen]

Hi S1

I have one more link for you about chip breakers, more about their design and ease of use: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolRev...ipbreaker.html

It's a short review of the LV chipbreaker, but I compared it with the LN and Stanley.

In doing so I realised that the LN and LV chip breakers have different supports at the leading edge, with the LN having less than the LV ..



There are a few other factors that may interest.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[section1]

Just from the pics there is a world of difference between the two in regards to the width of the leading edge but the cap irons are exactly the same, I know one seems to be shorter than the other but the slot for the adjustment is at the same distance from the leading edge. So the question still arises why mine fell short over yours? Anyway I just sat and after dinner I will have a good loker those links.

Having this sorted out is very important to me, I was contemplating today to either buy a veritas scraping plane or an LN blade and hone it to 50°. I just simply cannot afford to deal with these tearouts anymore.

[FenceFurniture]

I was contemplating today to either buy a veritas scraping plane or an LN blade and hone it to 50°.

Just LOVE my Veritas BU Jointer and Smoother with a 50° blade when required.

[section1]

Just having read your tool review it seems that LV is the winner here, ever since this debarcle I wondered about the stanley cap iron and how the chipbreaker curls over and in my mind is a 45° angle which say's to me they got it right so what's the new and improved version all about. I do have a cheapy stanley no.4 lieing around I wonder if their cap iron will fit till the new one arrives in my no.7.

I'm now going to have a read of the other link you sent me.

[Pac man]

Stanley 4 is 2 inches wide.
LN 7 is 2 3/8 inches wide.
the length of the 4 cap will be enough to cure your curiosity but not wide enough to do the job

[section1]

Derek I have read it and watched the video and am convinced that setting the angle of the chipbreaker between 50-80° will result in a clean shave. Also this article has confirmed some of the issues I have had when setting up the chipbreaker close 1/32-1/64 from the edge of the blade where clogging in the mouth occured. They writer recommends opening up the mouth or set the chibreaker further back about 1/16 from the edge which obviously worked for me and referring back to Denebs letter is what they recommend it to be.

So the nerves have kicked in the cap iron I ordered is $65 plus postage and even though I want to have another attempt well I'm a bit nervous to do so. I have to re read what Deneb mentions about flattening the underside if it really needs to be flattened but he did say if it aint broke then don't fix it. Just exactly at what angle or worse (cap iron)yet if it needs to be parallel then I have buckleys of flattening that underside. Now about grinding that 50° angle is also nerve racking what if the same things happens and it ends up being too short. If I could spare the extra cash I would of purchased two but I am convinced this will work if only I could get it right.

I believe that this will change the way we work wood and most importantly since it has been done before will eliminate the use of cabinet scrapers, high angle frogs, back bevels and high angle bevels if executed correctly on the chipbreaker which I haven't worked out exactly how which resulted in the destruction of my cap iron. This idea is every tool makers nightmare and I am of the opinion now why this has never been mentioned before in any magazine.

[D.W.]

I think the cap iron wasn't mentioned because few people knew how to use it to competently use it on a finished surface. Warren Mickley, who posts on another forum, pounded the ground (lightly is the term, I guess) stating that it is worth learning and it will eliminate (in his case) or nearly eliminate (my judgement, for most folks who don't learn it as well) the need for other stuff.

I know the "famous" bloggers here in the US had no clue, the same with the US and canadian traveling woodworking show and class types. No clue.

Lie Nielsen definitely had no clue, many of their planes didn't have a cap iron that could even get to the edge of the iron. They were patterned to end up short of the edge.

Warren is the only person I can remember consistently using the cap iron to eliminate tearout, though IIRC someone said Graham Blackburn has been discussing it for a while (for whatever reason, nobody felt any need to bring that to forums).

So, anyway, I don't think it was not discussed due to any planned omission, I think it was not discussed because most tool makers have no clue. Larry Williams, who has made most of the highest quality new wooden planes over here also posted a lot of unflattering information about double iron planes because he doesn't understand how to make or use them. That sounds harsh, but his conclusions about faults that they have can't lead anyone anywhere else. It's not his job to know that if he's making single iron planes, anyway, which is something his largest customer specified.

What you'll get with the cap iron use is something initially capable and that becomes more so with you, and the ability to keep far fewer planes at your bench, and keep the plane in motion a larger % of the time rather than searching for and setting up various trick planes. It's also easier to keep three or four planes from rusting than it is a dozen.

As of last year, LN was still telling people that the cap iron is "fiddly", but they also tell their customers not to power grind their irons, which is sort of ridiculous as the irons that were historically ground by hand were not A2 steel of extra thickness (that thickness being kind of pointless once the cap iron is mastered). Once you are relatively competent, you are not their target customer, anyway. That's my interpretation.

The stanley is opened up to you now, and the more you use it and various other planes and get over the fact that it doesn't feel like a solid billet of iron, the more you'll realize that you probably like to use it over even premium planes, which in my opinion have one more fault that isn't discussed - in heavy use they are perfectly ground and the level of friction from them is much higher than it is a slightly bellied stanley plane. The quality of the work you do with either is equal, a plane with several thousandths of belly (which you can get by hand lapping a plane) is superior in use, biased for the user in every way, and has less friction.

[derekcohen]

They writer recommends opening up the mouth or set the chibreaker further back about 1/16 from the edge which obviously worked for me and referring back to Denebs letter is what they recommend it to be.

I am not sure where you read this. Setting the chipbreaker back 1/16" from the edge prevents the chipbreaker from having any effect on the shaving.

I'm sure that David would have said start with it 1/16" and move it forward. Keep in mind that he was using a Stanley chipbreaker, which flexes, flattens when tightened, then creeps forward.

I have to re read what Deneb mentions about flattening the underside if it really needs to be flattened but he did say if it aint broke then don't fix it.

Every chipbreaker needs to be flattened - just some more than others.

Deneb does not set the chipbreaker - he would rather use a higher cutting angle.

Rule of Thumb: the closer you place the chipbreaker to the edge of the blade, the more important the flatness of the chipbreaker underside needs to be to avoid shavings running under the easing edge.

Consequently, if you pull the chipbreaker back to 1/16" - where it does not affect the shaving - the underside is of less importance.

Exploring the angle of the leading edge: http://planetuning.infillplane.com/h...pbreakers.html

Regards from Perth

Derek

[section1]

After having re read his letter to me he does say that as is the chipbreaker can go close to 1/32 or further back from the edge, but I know from experience that I have had trouble getting in that close without clogging in the mouth.

Just how thick or thin were my shavings I can't remember but I will set it up close again and find out. If you remember he mentions that the underside does not need flattening but if I did then I'm a little confused on his directions and I qoute.

"you should do as little as possible and make sure that you are following the undercut that has been ground into the back of the cap iron. If you match the angle that the cap iron meets the blade, then when you tighten the screw, the cap will flex and you will potentially create a gap for shavings to jam."

Following what undercut and at what angle, do you rest the back of the cap iron on the table and flatten that way like you would with a stanley or do you hold it parallel to the stone which would be impossible to do. These are the unanswered questions.

[derekcohen]

the chipbreaker can go close to 1/32 or further back from the edge, but I know from experience that I have had trouble getting in that close without clogging in the mouth.

That is why you have to open the mouth. The closing up of the chipbreaker blocks the mouth. Open the mouth to clear the shavings.

Opening the mouth - with the chipbreaker set - will have no effect on tearout. As a parallel, if using a plane with a high cutting angle, such as a HNT Gordon with a 60 degree bed, the mouth size also has no part in controlling tearout.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[section1]

So that's it then I'll just open the mouth and set the chipbreaker as close as possible since I cannot flatten the underside if fragments get underneath then that should serve as a gap filler.

[D.W.]

I didn't follow the whole discussion about preparation, but if chips get under the cap, you'll have a clog. Most caps are mild steel and can be bent in a vise a little bit if they have lost all semblance of relief.

[section1]

Welcome aboard David I would very much like your opinion on this topic. Derek was explaning about using the chipbreaker effectively to eliminate tearout by honing a secondary bevel of 45° or greater and flattening the underside perfectly flat. He used a veritas cap iron to describe this method and I tried it on my LN cap iron which resulted in it being too short for the adjustment mechanism to advance the blade. It also reduced the width of the underside to almost nothing as I thought it would because the underside of the LN chipbreaker is not smaller in width than the veritas version.

[planemaker]

Hi section1. Watch this video.

Stewie;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAwMzgs-1Bw

[section1]

Thanks Stewie I have watched this video before but it doesn't help because he using a standard stanley type capiron not the one's that are available today, especially the LN type with the stepped underside. If this step didn't exist I wouldn't have an issue with flattening but it does and I cannot figure out exactly how to lay it on the stone or diamond plate.